Answering "Why DO?"

[Ibn Rushd]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hey Everyone,

I honestly tried searching for older threads but wasn't able to find anything that truly addressed my question, my sincere apologies for the redundancy. If anyone can redirect me to a previous discussion, I'd be appreciative.

If I were to be asked "why DO?" tomorrow, I'd probably say something to this extent:

"I honestly don't see much of a difference between allopathy and osteopathy. At the end of the day, I want to simply be a doctor, I don't care for the initials after my name. In reading Gevitz's book about DOs in America, I learned that the two philosophies have basically converged in modern times. Both employ the paradigm of evidence based medicine, both use the same diagnostic tools, and with the exception of OMT, both learn the same medicine. I want to say, though, that I am interested in OMT. I think it would be worthwhile having an extra tool in my arsenal, in having an extra modality of treatment at my disposal when I practice. But all in all, I don't see the difference and would be more than happy to attend any school that makes possible my dream of becoming a physician."

Would that be a good answer? I actually outlined said answer to a third year osteopathic student a couple of weeks back and he basically said, "don't say that." He said that interviewers don't want to hear about the similarities between allopathy and osteopathy, but rather, about what makes osteopathy unique and something people should pursue. Talking to him left me somewhat confused. I thought I'd consult the wise men and women of SDN for their insight. 🙂 Is that answer not a good one? Should I rethink my approach? What is the best way to answer the question, with tact and whilst expressing a comprehensive knowledge of what osteopathy really entails?

Help is appreciated!

 

[djd2187]

I pretty much said the same thing but I added some of the principles as well. I talked about the principle of treating with a holistic approach, so treating their whole body and related it to the my end goal of oncology and also research I had done for my undergraduate institution. So read the principles again and try to find some correlation to your ultimate goal.

 

[DrMattOglesby]

great ideas in there 👍
you did a good job of avoiding the trap of becoming overly allegiant to one philosophy of medicine. many, but not all, applicants are looking to become capable physicians and the DO path is simply another means (albeit lesser known) to the same end. Nothing more really needs to be said, looks like you got your head on straight. 🙂

i dont really care what you say in your interviews, as long as youre being honest with yourself, you will be doing the right thing.

 

[Ibn Rushd]

Thanks guys!

I don't see the value of mentioning the whole "DOs have a holistic approach" thing. What I mean to say is, MDs and DOs alike both treat the whole person ... at least in theory. Both realms of medicine consider emotional, psychological, and personal factors in addition to the actual, tangible physical ailment. The question "why DO" inherently implies that something renders osteopathy unique. Maybe I'm looking into it too much, but I honestly don't feel a "holistic approach" does that (makes osteopathy unique). I guess I should do more research.

Now I'm wondering another thing. I completely understand the importance of being honest and speaking from the heart. But at the same rate, how can I ensure that I don't shoot myself in the foot with my honesty? At the end of the day, I want to get an acceptance. To get one, don't I need to say certain things, present myself a certain way, etc? I guess what I'm asking is, how does one reconcile being honest with wanting to impress an interviewer?

 

[dannyboy1]

Hey Everyone,

I honestly tried searching for older threads but wasn't able to find anything that truly addressed my question, my sincere apologies for the redundancy. If anyone can redirect me to a previous discussion, I'd be appreciative.

If I were to be asked "why DO?" tomorrow, I'd probably say something to this extent:

"I honestly don't see much of a difference between allopathy and osteopathy. At the end of the day, I want to simply be a doctor, I don't care for the initials after my name. In reading Gevitz's book about DOs in America, I learned that the two philosophies have basically converged in modern times. Both employ the paradigm of evidence based medicine, both use the same diagnostic tools, and with the exception of OMT, both learn the same medicine. I want to say, though, that I am interested in OMT. I think it would be worthwhile having an extra tool in my arsenal, in having an extra modality of treatment at my disposal when I practice. But all in all, I don't see the difference and would be more than happy to attend any school that makes possible my dream of becoming a physician."

Would that be a good answer? I actually outlined said answer to a third year osteopathic student a couple of weeks back and he basically said, "don't say that." He said that interviewers don't want to hear about the similarities between allopathy and osteopathy, but rather, about what makes osteopathy unique and something people should pursue. Talking to him left me somewhat confused. I thought I'd consult the wise men and women of SDN for their insight. 🙂 Is that answer not a good one? Should I rethink my approach? What is the best way to answer the question, with tact and whilst expressing a comprehensive knowledge of what osteopathy really entails?

Help is appreciated!

i think it comes down to your interviewer. I basically gave your answer at UMDNJ-SOM and the interviewer did not like it and proceeded to tell me that DO's treat the whole patient (whatever that means). At NYCOM my interviewer was very candid aout the fact that he thought there was no difference. In fact, he asked me what schools i applied to and when I mentioned some allo schools he said that "med school is med school; most of the applicants apply to allopathic programs as well and there is nothing wrong with that". My advice is to guage your interviewer and answer accordingly.

 

[bth7]

Thanks guys!

I don't see the value of mentioning the whole "DOs have a holistic approach" thing. What I mean to say is, MDs and DOs alike both treat the whole person ... at least in theory. Both realms of medicine consider emotional, psychological, and personal factors in addition to the actual, tangible physical ailment. The question "why DO" inherently implies that something renders osteopathy unique. Maybe I'm looking into it too much, but I honestly don't feel a "holistic approach" does that (makes osteopathy unique). I guess I should do more research.

Now I'm wondering another thing. I completely understand the importance of being honest and speaking from the heart. But at the same rate, how can I ensure that I don't shoot myself in the foot with my honesty? At the end of the day, I want to get an acceptance. To get one, don't I need to say certain things, present myself a certain way, etc? I guess what I'm asking is, how does one reconcile being honest with wanting to impress an interviewer?

I think honesty is the best policy. But in this case, equating MD and DO might tick some fanatic DO on the admissions committee off, and he'd make an example of you.

bth

 

[DRIN]

Why isn't "because I want to be a doctor and getting a D.O. degree will allow me to do that" a good enough reason?? It seems like all the D.O. secondaries I've filled out so far have asked some variation of this question, yet not one M.D. secondary has asked me why I want to be an M.D. Last year I knew someone who applied to a few D.O. schools and said something to the effect the OP stated and was rejected without an interview despite competitive stats.

 

[Chocolate Bear]

Why isn't "because I want to be a doctor and getting a D.O. degree will allow me to do that" a good enough reason?? It seems like all the D.O. secondaries I've filled out so far have asked some variation of this question, yet not one M.D. secondary has asked me why I want to be an M.D. Last year I knew someone who applied to a few D.O. schools and said something to the effect the OP stated and was rejected without an interview despite competitive stats.

That's exactly what I said. The degree is a means to the end of my getting to do what I want with my life. A doc I know was a DO and I loved how he practiced medicine, but many other great docs I know are MDs. Thus I applied to both and would make the decision as to which one was best for me when faced with the decision.

If you've shadowed a DO, I feel like it's really easy to give this kind of answer, to which interviewers really have nothing they can negatively say, even if they're some kind of "fanatic."

 

[Ibn Rushd]

Thanks again for the input, guys. I too have shadowed a DO (though I didn't see OMM) and my experiences with him have certainly motivated me to pursue a career in medicine. I don't think it's wise to thoroughly plan out and rehearse interview answers, but I do think having a general idea of what one wants to convey is a good way to prepare. That having been said, I definitely want to make mention of my shadowing experiences. I had overlooked that, but y'all have reminded me. So thanks! 🙂

 

[bth7]

Why isn't "because I want to be a doctor and getting a D.O. degree will allow me to do that" a good enough reason?? It seems like all the D.O. secondaries I've filled out so far have asked some variation of this question, yet not one M.D. secondary has asked me why I want to be an M.D. Last year I knew someone who applied to a few D.O. schools and said something to the effect the OP stated and was rejected without an interview despite competitive stats.

It should be.

Welcome to DO land.

 

[devlyyn]

I wouldn't say it the way you worded it. There is nothing wrong saying something like "In the beginning I was not familiar with the DO degree and after some research I determined that there really are not that many differences from the MD degree, but the differences that are there seem attractive and here is why..." I am an OMSI and I know that many DOs take pride in their profession and therefore in its distinguishing characteristics. Just to discount them and talk about how the professions are merging will get you in trouble more often than not in an interview.

 

[ZuperZtar]

Hey Everyone,

I honestly tried searching for older threads but wasn't able to find anything that truly addressed my question, my sincere apologies for the redundancy. If anyone can redirect me to a previous discussion, I'd be appreciative.

If I were to be asked "why DO?" tomorrow, I'd probably say something to this extent:

"I honestly don't see much of a difference between allopathy and osteopathy. At the end of the day, I want to simply be a doctor, I don't care for the initials after my name. In reading Gevitz's book about DOs in America, I learned that the two philosophies have basically converged in modern times. Both employ the paradigm of evidence based medicine, both use the same diagnostic tools, and with the exception of OMT, both learn the same medicine. I want to say, though, that I am interested in OMT. I think it would be worthwhile having an extra tool in my arsenal, in having an extra modality of treatment at my disposal when I practice. But all in all, I don't see the difference and would be more than happy to attend any school that makes possible my dream of becoming a physician."

Would that be a good answer? I actually outlined said answer to a third year osteopathic student a couple of weeks back and he basically said, "don't say that." He said that interviewers don't want to hear about the similarities between allopathy and osteopathy, but rather, about what makes osteopathy unique and something people should pursue. Talking to him left me somewhat confused. I thought I'd consult the wise men and women of SDN for their insight. 🙂 Is that answer not a good one? Should I rethink my approach? What is the best way to answer the question, with tact and whilst expressing a comprehensive knowledge of what osteopathy really entails?

Help is appreciated!

Rephrase the q back to the interviewer:

Reply: " The question isnt "why D.O." It's why not?"